Cited by 366Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Horvath, Karl, Jeitler, Klaus, Berghold, Andrea, Ebrahim, Susanne H, Gratzer, Thomas W, Plank, Johannes, Kaiser, Thomas, Pieber, Thomas R +1 more·2007·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite indications from epidemiological trials that higher blood glucose concentrations are associated with a higher risk for developing micro- and macrovascular complications, evidence for a beneficial effect of antihyperglycaemic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is conflicting. Two large studies, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) and the University Group Diabetes Program (UGDP), did not find a reduction of cardiovascular endpoints through improvement of metabolic control. The theoretical benefits of newer insulin analogues might result in fewer macrovascular and microvascular events. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of long-term treatment with long-acting insulin analogues (insulin glargine and insulin detemir) compared to NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were obtained from computerised searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and communication with experts in the field as well as insulin producing companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials in adults with diabetes mellitus type 2 and had a trial duration of at least 24 weeks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pooling of studies by means of random-effects meta-analyses was performed. MAIN RESULTS: Six studies comparing insulin glargine to NPH (Neutral Protamine Hagedorn) insulin and two studies comparing insulin detemir to NPH insulin were identified. In these trials, 1715 patients were randomised to insulin glargine and 578 patients to insulin detemir. Duration of the included trials ranged from 24 to 52 weeks. Metabolic control, measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a surrogate endpoint, and adverse effects did not differ in a clinical relevant way between treatment groups. While no statistically significant difference for severe hypoglycaemia rates was shown in any of the trials, the rate of symptomatic, overall and nocturnal hypoglycaemia was statistically significantly lower in patients treated with either insulin glargine or detemir. No evidence for a beneficial effect of long-acting analogues on patient-oriented outcomes like mortality, morbidity, quality of life or costs could be obtained. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests, if at all only a minor clinical benefit of treatment with long-acting insulin analogues for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 treated with "basal" insulin regarding symptomatic nocturnal hypoglycaemic events. Until long-term efficacy and safety data are available, we suggest a cautious approach to therapy with insulin glargine or detemir.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd005613.pub3

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Horvath, K., Jeitler, K., Berghold, A., Ebrahim, S. H., Gratzer, T. W., Plank, J., Kaiser, T., Pieber, T. R., & Siebenhofer, A.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Graz (AT)
  • Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (DE)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-04-18
Issue
2
Pages
CD005613-CD005613
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1953393606
Cited by
366
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 25
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, long-acting insulin analogues, insulin glargine, insulin detemir, NPH insulin, basal insulin, glycemic control, HbA1c, hypoglycemia, nocturnal hypoglycemia, adverse effects, cardiovascular outcomes, microvascular complications, cost-effectiveness, quality of life, mortality, morbidity
MeSH terms
Insulin Glargine, Insulin Detemir, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Insulin, Isophane, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Insulin, Long-Acting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review